Open AccessPlatelet count estimation using the CellaVision DM96 system
Author(s) -
Yuon Gao,
Adnan Mansoor,
Brenda Wood,
Heather H. Nelson,
Diane Higa,
Christopher Naugler
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal of pathology informatics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.009
H-Index - 17
ISSN - 2153-3539
DOI - 10.4103/2153-3539.114207
Subject(s) - hematology analyzer , platelet , peripheral blood , medicine , hematology , spectrum analyzer , reliability (semiconductor) , blood count , biomedical engineering , statistics , pathology , computer science , mathematics , physics , power (physics) , quantum mechanics , telecommunications
Rapid and accurate determination of platelet count is an important factor in diagnostic medicine. Traditional microscopic methods are labor intensive with variable results and are highly dependent on the individual training. Recent developments in automated peripheral blood differentials using a computerized system have shown many advantages as a viable alternative. The purpose of this paper was to determine the reliability and accuracy of the CellaVision DM 96 system with regards to platelet counts. Materials and Methods: One hundred twenty seven peripheral blood smears were analyzed for platelet count by manual microscopy, an automated hematology analyzer (Beckman Counter LH 780 or Unicel DXH 800 analyzers) and with the CellaVision DM96 system. Results were compared using the correlations and Bland-Altman plots. Results: Platelet counts from the DM96 system showed an R 2 of 0.94 when compared to manual platelet estimates and an R 2 of 0.92 when compared to the automated hematology analyzer results. Bland-Altman plots did not show any systematic bias
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom